Knife discrimination

Status
Not open for further replies.
DocJD said:
Believe what you like . My actual first hand experience says different .

But here's not the place to expand on these issues . :)
Click to expand...

Yes I will, and likewise to you. I have enough decades of first hand experience with litigtion, law enforcement and wealthy people to reach my conclusions as well.
So let's get back to talking about knives. :)
 
me2 said:
I’ve started asking people who say things like that why they have such a preoccupation with violence. I’m just cutting my sandwich over here.
Click to expand...
I make sandwiches from stuff that's already dead, so I don't need a knife for that.
 
When out in the eye of the public: I make sure to use my EDC for horrible violence against coffee cup lids...
I stab them, and twist the blade as it penetrates :eek:
So that I get a proper vent hole!
 
I've always thought of MT OTFs as glorified letter openers, especially as you go up the ladder on price. Sure they would work for killing, but I'm thinking you're supposed to enjoy the beauty and the engineering as well as the thrill that comes from the sound and visual once you push the button. Then the cool twack of pulling back the charging handle, and doing it all over again. Anyone who grew up with an Italian auto or even a Rizzuto should understand what I'm trying to say. Automatics are more fun than they are deadly; I would go with a Mad Dog for killing, but that's just me. :rolleyes:
 
David Mary said:
Also a great point. I don't necessarily think that just any ol' non-violent felony should be exempted from the prohibition, mind you, as many of these betray a predatory or at least exploitative and/or entitled attitude that I would not want to see empowered with the right to keep and bear arms.
Click to expand...

It's a slippery slope. I wouldn't want to take away anyone's right to bear arms unless it was absolutely warranted. It should almost be a case by case basis rather than just a blanket law.
 
Justice is recognizing and enforcing the forfeiture of rights, in proportion to the severity of a crime willingly committed - and in a manner calculated to benefit the public good.
 
kreole said:
The person went too far, but ..."Microtech Knives is a leading knife maker, located in Asheville, NC. We specialize in tactical, automatic, and OTF knives". That's their self-description. Unless tactical now means good for opening boxes and peeling apples :p, that's closer to that person's meaning than EDC
Click to expand...
Microtech doesn't advertise themselves as being in Asheville per their website. Asheville is a liberal dump.
 
Mitchell Knives said:
It's a slippery slope. I wouldn't want to take away anyone's right to bear arms unless it was absolutely warranted. It should almost be a case by case basis rather than just a blanket law.
Click to expand...
Adding on to this, if someone commits a crime and after the sentence is done, then that someone should have all rights restored. If someone still can't be trusted with weapons, then that someone shouldn't have been let out of prison.
 
Joopie said:
Adding on to this, if someone commits a crime and after the sentence is done, then that someone should have all rights restored. If someone still can't be trusted with weapons, then that someone shouldn't have been let out of prison.
Click to expand...
I respectfully disagree. If someone is found guilty of assault and battery with grievous bodily harm while committing a robbery, I don't necessarily think they should be sentenced to life in prison without parole, but neither do I think they should be allowed to own firearms - nor vote. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion - that's mine.

Not sure how we got from people freaking out over somebody's knife to all this, though.
 
rje58 said:
I respectfully disagree. If someone is found guilty of assault and battery with grievous bodily harm while committing a robbery, I don't necessarily think they should be sentenced to life in prison without parole, but neither do I think they should be allowed to own firearms - nor vote. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion - that's mine.

Not sure how we got from people freaking out over somebody's knife to all this, though.
Click to expand...
Can they buy a pocket knife? Should they be able to drive a car? Should they be able to own hammer? How about having medication prescribed to them? Can they buy cleaning chemicals? How about fertilizer? Should they have rope?

All ways to hurt someone else if the person chooses to, why pick certain rights away from someone who served their time unless you feel they are still not ok to rejoin society?
 
These people whose rights you wish to protect: they made conscious decisions to forfeit those rights...
 
Voting should only be forfeit when the crime is in some way against the public itself, such as electioneering or massive public corruption. As a punishment for 'ordinary' crimes it makes little sense and doesn't seem to serve as a deterrent or as a logical punishment in any way. All it does is encourage the escalated politicization of crime, which is already rampant and doesn't need any additional perverse incentives.
 
With voter turnout so low: we need all the voters that we have.
 
Bob Denman said:
These people whose rights you wish to protect: they made conscious decisions to forfeit those rights...
Click to expand...
It is beyond irresponsible to pretend that people in the US are charged and convicted of crimes based solely on objective guilt, no matter how you feel about policing and the criminal justice system it is a fact that many people end up with convictions for reasons that wouldn't necessarily make them intentional criminals. Some are unfairly targeted for unreasonable treatment, some are best described as convenient victims of circumstance, but we're presumably all adults here and there is no way any of us actually believe the courts generate honest results 100% of the time. It's simply impossible even if everyone involved had perfectly honorable motivations.
 
Bob Denman said:
With voter turnout so low: we need all the voters that we have.
Click to expand...
Yes, people should participate, and civic engagement is generally a positive sign regarding a person's role in society. People with criminal records should be encouraged to integrate and move on as much as possible, because that's best for everyone, not treated as second class citizens forever just to keep shoving their face in the mess.
 
Bob Denman said:
What should happen when they choose to not re-integrate?
Click to expand...
I've known and been friends with quite a few people who had felony convictions in their past. Each one did their time, learned from it, and are the most honest folks I know.

Some people on this forum are new here, we used to have a good friend CMFTW Matthew Freeman, a convicted felon, who worked hard to earn his sobriety. Damn good knife maker as he turned his life around, and was an inspiration for quite a few. He helped anyone he could with his time and knowledge. I'd trust Matt over many people.
 
Yo Mama said:
Can they buy a pocket knife? Should they be able to drive a car? Should they be able to own hammer? How about having medication prescribed to them? Can they buy cleaning chemicals? How about fertilizer? Should they have rope?

All ways to hurt someone else if the person chooses to, why pick certain rights away from someone who served their time unless you feel they are still not ok to rejoin society?
Click to expand...
Frankly, I'd rather that people who commit serious violent crimes not "rejoin society" as you put it, but that is selfish on the part of myself and my concerns for the safety of my family, friends and law-abiding citizens in general. Except for the worst crimes, such as murder, people deserve a second chance to "rejoin society". That doesn't necessarily include EVERY RIGHT - such as 2nd Amendment rights or voting rights, in my opinion - that citizens who have never committed violent crimes have.

Again, I respect your opinion - I just don't share it. You don't share my opinion. That's how things are supposed to work - we respect each other's views and go on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top